The 16 Russian nationals and groups indicted Friday for fraud in their backing of President Donald Trump before the 2016 presidential election organized a series of “Miners for Trump” pre-election rallies across Pennsylvania, possibly including one in Scranton.
(read more)

Amid an intense national debate over gun control after last week’s mass shooting at a Florida high school, a controversial Wayne County church is co-sponsoring a pro-gun rights dinner Saturday, four days before it wants couples to bring semi-automatic rifles to a blessing ceremony.
(read more)

Lackawanna and four other Northeast Pennsylvania counties fall entirely in single congressional districts, but Luzerne and Monroe counties remain split between two districts, according to a new district boundaries map released Monday.
(read more)

DUNMORE — Despite there being a number of people around, nobody wanted to come forward as a witness to a scuffle between two former Scranton School Board members Friday at the Greater Scranton YMCA, Dunmore police said Monday.
(read more)

Senior judges are paid a per-day rate for hearing legal matters on the bench. But seniors are not allowed to earn more than the current salary of the office from which they retired, less each judges' pension payment.

In fiscal year 2011-12 the work of senior judges was equivalent in time to that of 35 full-time trial judges, equating to taxpayer savings of approximately $3.5 million. Some seniors even sat on cases beyond their allowable paid service without compensation, and that accounts for additional taxpayer savings of $533,000.

To say the senior judges are "double dipping" is patently false. Double dipping suggests drawing a pension from one government entity while working for another.

Senior judges are those who have retired after having been elected and, in the majority of instances, served at least 10 years. Most senior judges have served far longer than that minimum. Rather than creating additional full-time, full-cost judgeships, seniors fill a gap when there are insufficient commissioned judges to meet caseload demands or when a judge is needed because of conflicts.

Pennsylvanians want practical, timely and cost-effective solutions in providing government services. It is because of them, in significant part, that we haven't had to close one courtroom for even one day, or postpone entire classes of cases for extended periods as other states have had to do.

Senior judges are important in ensuring that all Pennsylvanians have access to justice in a timely and effective manner.

RONALD D. CASTILLE

CHIEF JUSTICE OF PENNSYLVANIA

Law of land but not for the better

Editor: Lately, the mantra repeatedly echoed from the left pertaining to the Affordable Care Act is that such is the law, and therefore must be accepted.

What they unanimously fail to mention when championing the aforementioned law is that even with a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress, it took maneuvering by Senate majority leader Harry Reid to just barely pass the bill in the Senate via reconciliation. The Democrats had lost their filibuster-proof Senate majority with the special election of Republican Scott Brown in Democratic stronghold Massachusetts. Brown had campaigned on a promise to block the Affordable Care Act.

In the House, then-Speaker Nancy Pilosi had to arm-twist a faction of pro-life Democrats who opposed the bill. She eventually secured them at the last minute with a promise that the ACA would not cover abortion.

There was widespread disillusionment with the underhanded way in which the law was passed and historically sweeping gains were made by Republicans in the House 2010 congressional elections, largely due to their promise of blocking the ACA.

And while none of this is mentioned by proponents of the Affordable Care Act, I must concede that in one point they are absolutely and incontrovertibly correct: the Affordable Care Act is indeed the law. But so was slavery and male-only voting rights. Just because something is "the law" doesn't mean it's what's best or right.

Contrary to claims made here by some, the 13th Amendment (ending slavery), the 15th Amendment (prohibiting denial of suffrage based on race), and the 19th Amendment (prohibiting denial of suffrage based on gender) were all introduced and passed by Republican majorities in Congress. Democrats stood in opposition to all three of the amendments.

JIM ALEXANDER

JERMYN

Choices a plus

Editor: Tony Torquato's Oct. 8 letter citing high deductibles with the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is another example of partial information clouding an important issue.

One of the benefits of the ACA is to offer a variety of plans to meet the needs of a broad scope of the population. Will some people not find plans they can afford? Of course. Coverage for 100 percent of the population will not happen.

But many more of the citizens who do not have coverage will be able to get health insurance.

I agree with Mr. Torquato. Go to www.healthcare.gov or specific insurance company websites. There you will find information on a variety of plans, some with high deductibles, some with low ones.

DENNIS BRYON

BLAKELY

Bring on ruin

Editor: U.S. Rep. Lou Barletta makes an attempt to present himself as a moderate Republican in the Oct. 3 Times-Tribune. He is one who would gladly vote to end the government shutdown.

His spokesman, Tim Murtaugh, states, "The congressman has said from the very beginning if it came to the floor of the House he would vote for a clean (continuing resolution). He has never supported closing the government down and he believes that the best venue to fight over Obamacare is the debt ceiling."

He believes that the best venue to fight over Obamacare is the debt ceiling. Are we missing something here? President Obama refutes the kind of thinking that would end a shutdown only to produce a default, one that would have catastrophic effects here and throughout the world.

It is akin to getting through a plague only to tempt something much worse; Barletta is inviting an apocalypse.

RICHARD J. YOST

SOUTH ABINGTON TWP.

Obstacle, of course

Editor: What is Sen. Pat Toomey doing for us in Washington? Shutting the government down to get his way is just the peak of his stubborn obstructionist career.

Since his election, he has denied women the Paycheck Fairness Act. He has denied veterans the Veterans Jobs Corps Act. He has denied all of us jobs when he denied the Bring Jobs Home Act. Now, Mr. Toomey's shutdown is denying all Americans the health and safety we need and expect from our government.

His shutdown will now deny over 800,000 employees their paychecks. It will deny small businesses the Small Business Administration and revenue from tourism. It will deny veterans their benefits. It will deny women and children nutrition assistance. It will deny cancer patients clinical trials at the NIH.

While he is working so hard to deny us every good program intended to serve us, what is Mr. Toomey doing to help us?

INGRID EISINGER HUSISIAN

SOUTH ABINGTON TWP.

We welcome user discussion on our site, under the following guidelines:

To comment you must first create a profile and sign-in with a verified DISQUS account or social network ID. Sign up here.

Comments in violation of the rules will be denied, and repeat violators will be banned. Please help police the community by flagging offensive comments for our moderators to review. By posting a comment, you agree to our full terms and conditions. Click here to read terms and conditions.